Draft bill 370.

Withdrawn
  • TypeDraft bill
  • 370
  • FiledFebruary 24, 2026

Summary.

The draft bill proposes adding Article 169-A to the Criminal Procedure Code, immediately after Article 169. The provision would make acquittals issued at first instance by Trial Courts unappealable by the Public Prosecutor’s Office and private complainants, whether they find that the alleged act did not occur, that no perpetrator was identified, or that there are insufficient grounds for trial, or rest on any other ground for acquittal.

The Public Prosecutor’s Office could appeal an acquittal in only three circumstances. The first concerns a judgment based on the nullity or ineffectiveness of an earlier interlocutory decision, where a challenge to that decision remains pending and its validity is decisive to the legality of the trial. The second covers a confession by the accused or the emergence of new, decisive evidence unknown during the trial that, had it been presented in time, would have been sufficient to change the acquittal. The third allows an appeal limited to the legality or length of the sentence where there is a conviction for other offenses arising from connected acts and the sentencing decision determines which legal regime applies.

In those circumstances, the competent Chamber (Sala) or Court would decide summarily whether to admit the appeal, within a maximum of 15 calendar days after it is filed. If the appeal is found inadmissible, the acquittal would become final and have res judicata effect. The extraordinary appeal could not lead to a new trial for the same acts in violation of the principle of non bis in idem. Once the appeal is admitted, the appellate body (órgano de alzada) would examine only matters related to the exception invoked and would take measures to protect the finality of the judgment and prevent unjustified delays. The provision preserves, where available, constitutional actions and extraordinary remedies provided for by the Constitution or law that respect the prohibition against double jeopardy.

The draft bill also proposes adding Article 7-A to the Criminal Procedure Code. It would state the state’s guarantee that a person acquitted by a final judgment will not be prosecuted again for the same acts, except in the exceptional, narrowly defined circumstances established by procedural law. An interpretation clause links the new provisions to due process, effective judicial protection, legal certainty, and protection against double jeopardy. The text reiterates both additions and provides for their application to criminal proceedings pending when it enters into force. For appeals already filed that fall within the new exceptions, the Chambers would determine the applicable procedure under the new rules, while respecting constitutional guarantees and the parties’ acquired rights. The text would enter into force on the day after its publication in the Official Gazette (Gaceta Oficial).

The public bodies involved are the Public Prosecutor’s Office, the Trial Courts, the Chambers, and appellate bodies. The provisions would affect accused and acquitted persons, private complainants, and those involved in pending criminal proceedings.

What it proposes.

  • Appeals against first-instance acquittals.
  • Exceptions allowing the Public Prosecutor’s Office to appeal.
  • Admissibility of appeals and protection against double jeopardy.

Who it would affect.

  • Public Prosecutor’s Office (Ministerio Público)
  • Private complainants
  • Accused or acquitted persons
  • Trial Courts (Tribunales de Juicio), Chambers (Salas), and appellate bodies (órganos de alzada)

Key points.

  1. First-instance acquittals issued by Trial Courts would be unappealable by the Public Prosecutor’s Office and private complainants.Art. 1
  2. The Public Prosecutor’s Office could appeal an acquittal based on the nullity or ineffectiveness of an interlocutory decision where a challenge to that decision remains pending and its validity is decisive to the trial.Art. 1
  3. A confession or new, decisive evidence unknown during the trial could support an appeal by the Public Prosecutor’s Office if it would have been sufficient to change the acquittal.Art. 1
  4. An appeal could be limited to the legality or length of the sentence where there is a conviction for other offenses arising from connected acts.Art. 1
  5. The competent Chamber or Court would decide admissibility through a summary procedure within 15 calendar days; a finding of inadmissibility would make the acquittal final.Art. 1
  6. The extraordinary appeal could not result in a new trial for the same acts, and the appellate body would examine only the admitted exception.Art. 1
  7. Proposed Article 7-A would protect people with final acquittals from renewed criminal prosecution for the same acts, subject only to narrowly defined statutory exceptions.Art. 2